A belief revision framework for revising epistemic states with partial epistemic states

Belief revision performs belief change on an agent’s beliefs when new evidence (either of the form of a propositional formula or of the form of a total pre-order on a set of interpretations) is received. Jeffrey’s rule is commonly used for revising probabilistic epistemic states when new information is probabilistically uncertain. In this paper, we propose a general epistemic revision framework where new evidence is of the form of a partial epistemic state. Our framework extends Jeffrey’s rule with uncertain inputs and covers well-known existing frameworks such as ordinal conditional function (OCF) or possibility theory. We then define a set of postulates that such revision operators shall satisfy and establish representation theorems to characterize those postulates. We show that these postulates reveal common characteristics of various existing revision strategies and are satisfied by OCF conditionalization, Jeffrey’s rule of conditioning and possibility conditionalization. Furthermore, when reducing to the belief revision situation, our postulates can induce Darwiche and Pearl’s postulates C1 and C2.

Revising Partial Pre-Orders with Partial Pre-Orders: A Unit-Based Revision Framework

Belief revision studies strategies about how agents revise their belief states when receiving new evidence. Both in classical belief revision and in epistemic revision, a new input is either in the form of a (weighted) propositional formula or a total
pre-order (where the total pre-order is considered as a whole).
However, in some real-world applications, a new input can be a partial pre-order where each unit that constitutes the partial pre-order is important and should be considered individually. To address this issue, in this paper, we study how a partial preorder representing the prior epistemic state can be revised by another partial pre-order (the new input) from a different perspective, where the revision is conducted recursively on the individual units of partial pre-orders. We propose different revision operators (rules), dubbed the extension, match, inner and outer revision operators, from different revision points of view. We also analyze several properties for these operators.

A framework for managing uncertain inputs: An axiomization of rewarding

The success postulate in belief revision ensures that new evidence (input) is always trusted. However, admitting uncertain input has been questioned by many researchers. Darwiche and Pearl argued that strengths of evidence should be introduced to determine the outcome of belief change, and provided a preliminary definition towards this thought. In this paper, we start with Darwiche and Pearl’s idea aiming to develop a framework that can capture the influence of the strengths of inputs with some rational assumptions. To achieve this, we first define epistemic states to represent beliefs attached with strength, and then present a set of postulates to describe the change process on epistemic states that is determined by the strengths of input and establish representation theorems to characterize these postulates. As a result, we obtain a unique rewarding operator which is proved to be a merging operator that is in line with many other works. We also investigate existing postulates on belief merging and compare them with our postulates. In addition, we show that from an epistemic state, a corresponding ordinal conditional function by Spohn can be derived and the result of combining two epistemic states is thus reduced to the result of combining two corresponding ordinal conditional functions proposed by Laverny and Lang. Furthermore, when reduced to the belief revision situation, we prove that our results induce all the Darwiche and Pearl’s postulates as well as the Recalcitrance postulate and the Independence postulate.

AgentSpeak+: AgentSpeak with Probabilistic Planning

AgentSpeak is a logic-based programming language, based on the Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) paradigm, suitable for building complex agent-based systems. To limit the computational complexity, agents in AgentSpeak rely on a plan library to reduce the planning problem to the much simpler problem of plan selection. However, such a plan library is often inadequate when an agent is situated in an uncertain environment. In this paper, we propose the AgentSpeak+ framework, which extends AgentSpeak with a mechanism for probabilistic planning. The beliefs of an AgentSpeak+ agent are represented using epistemic states to allow an agent to reason about its uncertain observations and the uncertain effects of its actions. Each epistemic state consists of a POMDP, used to encode the agent’s knowledge of the environment, and its associated probability distribution (or belief state). In addition, the POMDP is used to select the optimal actions for achieving a given goal, even when facing uncertainty.

Probabilistic Planning in AgentSpeak using the POMDP framework.

AgentSpeak is a logic-based programming language, based on the Belief-Desire-Intention (BDI) paradigm, suitable for building complex agent-based systems. To limit the computational complexity, agents in AgentSpeak rely on a plan library to reduce the planning problem to the much simpler problem of plan selection. However, such a plan library is often inadequate when an agent is situated in an uncertain environment. In this paper, we propose the AgentSpeak+ framework, which extends AgentSpeak with a mechanism for probabilistic planning. The beliefs of an AgentSpeak+ agent are represented using epistemic states to allow an agent to reason about its uncertain observations and the uncertain effects of its actions. Each epistemic state consists of a POMDP, used to encode the agent’s knowledge of the environment, and its associated probability distribution (or belief state). In addition, the POMDP is used to select the optimal actions for achieving a given goal, even when facing uncertainty.

Can(Plan)+: Extending the Operational Semantics of the BDI Architecture to deal with Uncertain Information

The BDI architecture, where agents are modelled based on their beliefs, desires and intentions, provides a practical approach to develop large scale systems. However, it is not well suited to model complex Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems pervaded by uncertainty. In this paper we address this issue by extending the operational semantics of Can(Plan) into Can(Plan)+. We start by modelling the beliefs of an agent as a set of epistemic states where each state, possibly using a different representation, models part of the agent's beliefs. These epistemic states are stratified to make them commensurable and to reason about the uncertain beliefs of the agent. The syntax and semantics of a BDI agent are extended accordingly and we identify fragments with computationally efficient semantics. Finally, we examine how primitive actions are affected by uncertainty and we define an appropriate form of lookahead planning.

Rational Partial Choice Functions and Their Application to Belief Revision.

Necessary and sufficient conditions for choice functions to be rational have been intensively studied in the past. However, in these attempts, a choice function is completely specified. That is, given any subset of options, called an issue, the best option over that issue is always known, whilst in real-world scenarios, it is very often that only a few choices are known instead of all. In this paper, we study partial choice functions and investigate necessary and sufficient rationality conditions for situations where only a few choices are known. We prove that our necessary and sufficient condition for partial choice functions boils down to the necessary and sufficient conditions for complete choice functions proposed in the literature. Choice functions have been instrumental in belief revision theory. That is, in most approaches to belief revision, the problem studied can simply be described as the choice of possible worlds compatible with the input information, given an agent’s prior belief state. The main effort has been to devise strategies in order to infer the agents revised belief state. Our study considers the converse problem: given a collection of input information items and their corresponding revision results (as provided by an agent), does there exist a rational revision operation used by the agent and a consistent belief state that may explain the observed results?